TAUS v. LOFTUS Part III
Statements by defendant, a mental health professional and the author of a scholarly article, that plaintiff the subject of a controversial study of recovered memories of child sexual abuse engaged in "destructive behavior that I cannot reveal on advice of my attorney," and that plaintiff was in the Navy related to newsworthy events and could not be the subject of an action for disclosure of private facts. Statement that was made by defendant at a professional conference attended by other mental health professionals and was related to the subject of the conference was protected by statutory common interest privilege where plaintiff failed to present evidence that would reasonably support an inference that defendant acted with actual malice. For purposes of anti SLAPP motion, plaintiff was unlikely to prevail on claim that defendant's disclosure of the initials of plaintiff's first and last names at a deposition in an unrelated case constituted disclosure of private facts where plaintiff was not well enough known that the disclosure of her initials would have led to widespread identification, and plaintiff had, by the time of the deposition, publicly identified herself by full name as being the subject of the study in question. Plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case of intrusion into private matters based upon defendant's collection and dissemination of information contained in court records in absence of showing that such records were of confidential juvenile matters. Plaintiff established prima facie case that defendant committed the tort of intrusion into private matters in obtaining personal information about plaintiff from plaintiff's former foster mother by intentionally misrepresenting defendant's relationship with mental health professional who had treated plaintiff as a child.
Comments on TAUS v. LOFTUS Part III